Radio Frequency Identification (“RFID”) tags and systems have been widely adopted in recent years for the traceability and tracking of a wide variety of products and objects. Although these wireless systems are similar to UPC bar code type systems in that they allow for the non-contact reading of various products, items and devices, they are an effective improvement over UPC bar code systems in a variety of ways. In fact, RFID tags and systems can be vastly superior to bar code systems in many manufacturing and other hostile environments where bar code labels are inconvenient or wholly impractical. One advantage of RFID tags and systems is the non-line-of-sight nature of the technology, whereby tags can be read through a variety of substances such as snow, fog, clothing, paint, packaging materials or other conditions where UPC bar codes or other such technologies would be useless.
In most applications, an ordinary RFID system comprises three primary components: 1) a transceiver for transmitting and receiving radio frequency signals, 2) a transponder electronically programmed with data, preferably comprising unique information, and 3) at least one antenna. The transceiver is generally analogous to a bar code scanner, and controls communication within the system by restricting when and where data is written, stored and acquired. The transponder is analogous to a bar code label, and typically comprises at least a small integrated circuit chip, with this chip often being referred to as an RFID Integrated Circuit (“RFIDIC”). Antennae function as conduits between RFIDICs and transceivers, as RFIDICs are frequently too small to act as their own antennae and collect a sufficient level of emitted radio signals standing alone. Antennae can be attached to the transceiver, transponder, or both, and are generally used to emit and/or collect radio signals to activate an RFIDIC, read data from the RFIDIC and/or write data to it.
In general, the term “RFID tag” refers to the combination of the RFIDIC and any antennae attached thereto. An RFID tag is essentially a microchip with antennae that listens for a radio query and responds by transmitting an identification code that is usually unique to that RFID tag. In operation, the transceiver emits radio waves that usually range from a fraction of an inch to 100 feet or more, depending upon the power output and radio frequency utilized. When an individual RFID tag passes through an electromagnetic zone covered by the transceiver, it detects the activation signal of the transceiver and responds by emitting its individual recorded code. The “reader” or transceiver then collects this emitted code and passes this data along to a host computer or other like device for processing. Standard apparatuses and methods for manufacturing RFID tags are well known, and instances of such apparatuses and methods can be found, for example, in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,100,804 and 6,509,217, both of which are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.
RFID tags come in a wide variety of shapes and sizes, and are usually noted for their particularly small and unobtrusive nature. Large RFID tags include, for example, the hard plastic anti-theft devices attached to merchandise in stores, credit-card shaped tags for use in access applications, and screw shaped tags for use with trees or wooden items. In smaller versions, animal tracking tags inserted beneath the skin can be as small as a pencil lead in diameter and one-half inch in length. Applications and venues utilizing some form of RFID tags and systems vary, and can include, for example, package delivery, luggage handling, highway toll monitoring, livestock identification, and automated vehicle identification systems, among others. Other applications are thought to be possible as RFID tag and system technologies become further developed and refined.
It has become popular in recent years for many gaming (i.e., gambling) operators, such as casinos, Internet-based groups and other gaming establishments, to provide various ways of allowing players to engage in betting and wager type games from remote locations. In such instances, a player can generally participate in gaming activities from a remote gaming terminal that is at some location other than an established casino floor or other authorized and regulated gaming location. Various mediums that can be used for providing a remote gaming terminal include, for example, interactive television (iTV), personal computers, and established kiosks with customized controls and displays, among others. In addition, remote gaming can take place, for example, over a closed network, whereby patrons can engage in gaming activities from established kiosks or their private hotel rooms, as well as online, whereby players can participate in gaming activities on various Internet websites at virtually any location.
A number of problems have emerged, however, with respect to the advent of remote gaming. Many forms of gaming are highly regulated, albeit with wide variations in the rules and regulations existing from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and it is particularly significant that the location of the player typically governs which set of laws apply. While many gaming operators are generally responsible in providing and running their closed gaming networks and/or Internet gaming websites from locations where gaming is legal, remote access to the gaming activities provided therein can sometimes problematically be had from locations where gaming is illegal, particularly in the case of Internet websites. Furthermore, virtually all jurisdictions that allow some form of gaming have strict laws and regulations with respect to the minimum age of any player that can participate in such games. While age verification and player restrictions can be easily and reliably made on a casino floor or at any other authorized and regulated gaming location, such measures tend to be more difficult and less reliable at remote gaming terminals. In fact, the control of underage gaming at environments such as hotel rooms, personal computers and other remote locations is a continuing problem that limits the growth of legitimate mobile or Internet-based gaming worldwide. The verification of who is trying to place bets from a remote gaming terminal and if such a person is underage is a well-known problem.
As a result of these and other related problems, many gaming operators and regulators have considered the impact of remote gaming and have started to implement various rules and procedures specific to remote gaming activities. In general, these added rules and procedures address some of the problems associated with the enforcement of existing laws and regulations, such as age limits, as well as issues related to the new potential availability of gaming activities to players located in jurisdictions where gaming is illegal. One example of such an added procedure is for the gaming system to require the verification of legitimate players whose identities have been previously confirmed before any remote gaming activities can commence. In some instances, players must enter individualized identification codes, such as PIN numbers, into the remote gaming terminal to identify themselves before gaming may begin. Other possible procedures involve the reading of a fingerprint or some other biometric indicator by a connected device at the remote gaming terminal to verify the identity of a player before gaming can begin.
Such verification procedures and systems can be readily defrauded or circumvented in many to cases, however, as an underage child could learn the access code of a parent or other adult and then engage in gaming activities illegally. In addition, a legitimate player might properly log in to such a gaming system at a remote gaming terminal and then completely hand off control to another user or otherwise permit another player to play. Another disadvantage of such verification procedures and systems is that they are all a “one-time” process, such that gaming activities at the remote gaming terminal are allowed to continue on indefinitely after an initial verification procedure, despite the potential for changes that would result in the termination of gaming activities in a more closely monitored environment. Such changes could involve a significant reduction in the capacity in the legitimate player, a criminal interception or interference of a gaming session by unscrupulous third parties, or simply a handing off of the remote gaming terminal from the legitimate player to an underage or otherwise unauthorized user.
While existing systems and methods for providing player verification in remote gaming terminals may grant some protection against unauthorized or improper gaming activity, improvements and better systems and methods are usually welcomed and encouraged. In particular, there exists a need for such systems and methods to be more reliable in verifying players correctly and not allowing unauthorized players access to various gaming events.